Knowledge Skills in Combat

[irdeggman]

I also have a player with jack-of-all-trades feat. Can make a check on any skill as if "trained" so this player is running around frequently asking to make checks all the time.

I said I would allow the feat if it wasn't abused and he has come close several times.

We are also using action points which can add to the d20 result.

The skill description says "a bit" of useful information, it doens't say "one piece" so there is at least some DM flexability there.

 

[billd91]

I disagree with you AND irdeggman. I think the DCs are exactly right. However, I am using DC 10 + CR, which is the DC that has been used in MM4 & MM5. In MM5 they mention that the rule for setting the DC has been changed (probably it's mentioned in MM4, as well, but I don't have it, so I cannot tell).

I think this still makes the DCs wrong. The DCs should be based more on the general commonness of the monster or the size of its reputation. Why would adventurers know less about powerful red dragons than they would know about a low-CR but more obscure creature only found in the underdark?

I'll grant that CR is better than HD, but I still think the approach is wrong.

 

[Nifft]

I've renamed Dungeoneering to "Dark Arts" (since it focuses on oozes and aberrations), and I adjust the DCs for rarity, but otherwise pretty much use the system as written.

Giving concrete value to the Knowledge skills is one of the very good things 3.5e did.

Cheers, -- N

 

[RefinedBean]

Do you allow the use of the various knowledge skills for the characters to gain insight into creatures they are fighting? Or do you feel too much is given away by characters able to figure out strengths and weaknesses of creatures? Also, do you allow the skill trick Collector of Stories (allows a +5 to one knowledge check per encounter to know details about a creature)?

It might be hard to keep track of, but you can also lower/raise the DCs based upon the encounter in question...is it a random encounter, nothing to do with the over-arching plot? A battle that they might have been anticipating, but didn't know the particulars of? Knowledge checks are always tricky when it comes to creatures...it's the one set of skills that the DM has almost complete control over. Just use your best judgment based on who's making what check!

 

[Victim]

In my opinion, the skills are more useful as far as justifying player knowledge of the monsters from having read the MMs than for getting new information.

 

[irdeggman]

I think this still makes the DCs wrong. The DCs should be based more on the general commonness of the monster or the size of its reputation. Why would adventurers know less about powerful red dragons than they would know about a low-CR but more obscure creature only found in the underdark?

That is what circumstance bonuses are for

 

[Dross]

We use knowledge skills for monster ID, and since most of the group has/have had a DM's cap on, there is a lot of metagame knowledge at the table.

In my opinion (and how I work it) for the extra bits of info come from the most visible abilites of the critter (although I have more than 3 levels). Using spells as an example, if something is hard to overcome with spells it may be because of SR or good saves (a higher roll figures out which):

The lowest check gives monster type and the type's general abilites.
then:
1) Movement modes: speed, teleport, flight, burrowing.

2a) Most obvious or spectactular attack routines (and possibly side effects): lots of attacks, grapples, swallowing, spells (including spell-like powers), roars/screams/yells/auras/etc that cause conditions. However I do not include mechanics but use general terms, and it is not always the thing that causes most HP damage that gets noticed.

2b)Most obvious defenses. blunt weapons for skeltons (not easily damaged with spears, swords and similar weapons), needing a specific material to hurt (but not necessarily which material), fast healing. Not harmed by an energy (again general terms like resistant, hard to hurt and immune used).

3a) less obvious attacks, more those things that are by-products of being hit for HP damage: diseases and poisons that take a while to affect someone. the (as metioned) potion destruction.

3b) less obvious defenses: SR v good saves, little used methods against the critter ( like poison).

Even with an amazingly good roll I will not give out exact damage ranges.

 

[Dross]

As another thought.

Compare knowledge checks to a football side:
what type of football to they play (gridion, rugby league, soccer, rugby union, Australian Rules).
are the wingers quick? the goal kickers accurate? play dirty/rough? good defense? good endurance? etc

 

[shdwrnr]

I like the way dragon magazine's ecologies articles do it. They have a list of DC's for applicable knowledge skills listing what one with increasing levels of familiarity would know about those creatures. This includes things like resistances, immunities, special attacks, as well as perhaps a myth or two at lower DCs (representing a misconception common to those who have perhaps heard of the creature but don't actually have any experience with them).

 

[Jhaelen]

I think this still makes the DCs wrong. The DCs should be based more on the general commonness of the monster or the size of its reputation. Why would adventurers know less about powerful red dragons than they would know about a low-CR but more obscure creature only found in the underdark?

I'll grant that CR is better than HD, but I still think the approach is wrong.

It doesn't invalidate the approach/rule if there are exceptional cases where it doesn't work as well as in the majority of cases. A rule that works in 90% of the cases is still better than not having any rule at all, but maybe that's just my opinion.

Regarding creatures that come with a range of CR ratings (such as dragons or templated creatures) it is mentioned that a knowledge check with a DC of 15 should provide general information.

If, for some reason you as the DM feel that a DC for a given creature is inappropriate you can just add a modifier. There's a precedent for this in MM5, too:
The mindflayers of Thoon have higher knowledge DCs than those resulting from applying the normal formula. A sidebar explains that this is because they are supposed to resemble a pretty recent addition to the setting, so it's unlikely that anyone will know much about them.